Gay Marriage supporters said this would never happen...

[RandallFlagg]

Sorry, same sex couples are NOT eligible to marry because that isn't marriage. You want to redefine marriage to include same sex couples, in order to legitimize homosexual lifestyle. You do not have a civil right to legitimize your sexual behavior through marriage, nor does society wish to allow such nonsense. It's not a 14th Amendment issue because marriage, the union of a man and woman in matrimony, is not being prohibited to homosexuals.

Sorry, but it most certainly is. But not to worry...you do not have to participate if it bothers you.

Sorry, it most certainly isn't. But you are correct, I don't have to participate in it... I can choose to participate instead, in an initiative to draft a Constitutional Amendment establishing marriage as the union of a man and woman. Such an Amendment would likely be ratified since basically every 'gay marriage' initiative has failed overwhelmingly at the ballot box. So okay... you don't want to be reasonable and accept my idea of Civil Unions to resolve the issue? Fine... we'll see how you like the alternative.

That's the thing. In most of the states that have suddenly had "gay marriage" foisted on them, it has been as the result of activist judges. Take Colorado for instance. Gay marriage is illegal in the state. Recently, however, activist judges have Ok'd the issuing of gay marriage licenses in direct violation of the law. When the Attorney General of the state issued a TRO to stop this practice, the Governor told him to "stand down".

This is your "nation of Laws". Don't like a law on the books? Screw it! Ignore the pesky law - don't worry about the consequences. This is why America NEEDS to wake the hell up and understand that we are entering a period (especially when it comes to "liberals") of Anarchy. We are saddled with a president and an Attorney General who do NOTHING when it comes to particular enforcement - in fact - they ENCOURAGE disobedience.

 

[Derideo_Te]

A few days ago, I got a great big belly laugh from a gay marriage advocate over my assertion that government sanctioning of sexuality through gay marriage would open the door to other less desirable possibilities, like pedophilia.

"Oh, you must be out of your mind-- we know better than to have sex with children!" they chortled in disbelief that I would even argue such ridiculous nonsense. "That will never happen," they said.

Well... here ya go...
'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males'

"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”

Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.

The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.
Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.”

Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.

Another attendee, and enthusiastic participant from the floor, was one Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, long-time campaigner for the legalisation of sex with children and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he wrote on his blog afterwards. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”

Last week, after the conviction of Rolf Harris, the report into Jimmy Savile and claims of an establishment cover-up to protect a sex-offending minister in Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, Britain went into a convulsion of anxiety about child abuse in the Eighties. But unnoticed amid the furore is a much more current threat: attempts, right now, in parts of the academic establishment to push the boundaries on the acceptability of child sex.

===================================================

Now we know from every liberal "cause" that has ever come down the pike, if academia is saying it today, it will be on the legislative docket tomorrow, if liberals have their say.

Here's yet another alarming immoral indicator:
Australian judge says incest may no longer be a taboo

Judge in Australia says incest may no longer be a taboo and the only reason it is criminal is potential birth abnormalities, which can be solved by abortion.

Judge Garry Neilson, from the district court in the state of New South Wales, likened incest to homosexuality, which was once regarded as criminal and "unnatural" but is now widely accepted.

He said incest was now only a crime because it may lead to abnormalities in offspring but this rationale was increasingly irrelevant because of the availability of contraception and abortion.

"A jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now 'available', not having [a] sexual partner," the judge said.
"If this was the 1950s and you had a jury of 12 men there, which is what you'd invariably have, they would say it's unnatural for a man to be interested in another man or a man being interested in a boy. Those things have gone."

===================================================

My argument against governmental sanctioning of gay marriage is that once you've established under the law, that sexual proclivity can be a determinate factor in marriage, all bets are off... you can essentially argue for ANY sexual proclivity to be legitimized on the basis of "equal protection" and the Constitution. This is NOT an equal rights issue, it is a MORAL issue with profound ramifications and consequences.

Now, I am not some prudish stick in the mud who hates gay people and doesn't want them to be happy in life. I happen to have some very close gay friends, one such couple who's wedding I attendended in 1986! Did I mention this was in rural Alabama? Of course it wasn't a state-sanctioned "marriage" by law, it was merely a private wedding ceremony on a hillside with a Rastafarian minister and close family and friends attending, but there was no Sheriff Bubba Billybob there to tell them they couldn't do it, nor were there any Bible-thumping protesters preventing the event. They had a cake... not sure who made it for them, but it was there. They had a photographer, went on a honeymoon, we threw rice... they've been together now for nearly 30 years. Curiously enough, neither of them support "Gay Marriage!"

Their viewpoint (and mine, which was adopted from them), is that the government should not be involved with "marriage" at all. That should be left to individuals and churches to define in society, and NOT mandated by the government. Instead, they favor comprehensive Civil Union legislation which would essentially eliminate all government recognition of "marriage" and replace it with simple partnership agreements by contract between any two consenting adults. This approach would ostensibly give all sides what they claim to want. Religious people get to maintain "sanctity of traditional marriage" while gay couples obtain a way and means to acquire the benefits and tax advantages of a couple. It also has an added bonus, in that such a contract could be used for a variety of platonic relationship arrangements, like a daughter caring for her aging mother, or two spinster sisters living together.

It's a purely sensible approach that resolves the issue once and for all.

The Telegraph is a Murdoch owned tabloid with zero credibility but Boss will use any drivel that he can find to spew his religious bigotry.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

The only people who are seeking to make 'changes' are those who are opposed to equal rights for all Americans.

They failed with DOMA and they will fail with a Constitutional amendment too.

 

[Silhouette]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

 

[RandallFlagg]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

 

[Silhouette]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

Well Randall, glad to see the Tea Party and the Clinton democrats [me and millions more] agree on something for a change..

 

[RandallFlagg]

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

Well Randall, glad to see the Tea Party and the Clinton democrats [me and millions more] agree on something for a change..

It has nothing to do with ANY party. It's common sense. This country is being destroyed from within by Lawyers, Judges and liberal assholes.

Both parties - the republicans and the democrats have changed. They have become monsters who live by the lawyer and the judge. There was a time (believe me, I was there) when the republicans and the democrats worked together to better the country. IT'S TRUE!

Now, Washington DC is overrun with lawyers. William Shakespeare was correct. Kill all the lawyers. They are parasites who feed off of misery. Neither party can wipe their own asses any longer without checking with Goddamned lawyers to see if it is "politically expedient" for them to do so.

This country will end one day on the order of some fat-assed judge. Watch and see.

 

[bodecea]

Sorry, same sex couples are NOT eligible to marry because that isn't marriage. You want to redefine marriage to include same sex couples, in order to legitimize homosexual lifestyle. You do not have a civil right to legitimize your sexual behavior through marriage, nor does society wish to allow such nonsense. It's not a 14th Amendment issue because marriage, the union of a man and woman in matrimony, is not being prohibited to homosexuals.

Sorry, but it most certainly is. But not to worry...you do not have to participate if it bothers you.

Sorry, it most certainly isn't. But you are correct, I don't have to participate in it... I can choose to participate instead, in an initiative to draft a Constitutional Amendment establishing marriage as the union of a man and woman. Such an Amendment would likely be ratified since basically every 'gay marriage' initiative has failed overwhelmingly at the ballot box. So okay... you don't want to be reasonable and accept my idea of Civil Unions to resolve the issue? Fine... we'll see how you like the alternative.

Well, good luck with that.

 

[bodecea]

Marriage is civil law subject to the provisions established by the contract laws written by the states and administered by state courts – consequently marriage and government can't be 'separated.'

The mistake made by those opposed to equal protection rights for gay Americans is to incorrectly perceive the issue as one where same-sex couples are seeking to 'change' something, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

Same-sex couples seek only their comprehensive civil rights, to indeed exercise the right to access marriage law in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

I've been to many Gay Pride Parades from NYC to San Francisco to Long Beach to San Diego.....how many have you been to?

While there are a few bar floats with scantily clad dancers....most marchers are sports clubs, churches, politicians, help organizations, military (in the last few years), businesses, etc.

So...again...how many gay pride parades have you been to?

 

[Ibentoken]

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

I've been to many Gay Pride Parades from NYC to San Francisco to Long Beach to San Diego.....how many have you been to?

While there are a few bar floats with scantily clad dancers....most marchers are sports clubs, churches, politicians, help organizations, military (in the last few years), businesses, etc.

So...again...how many gay pride parades have you been to?

I don't care how many queer parades you've been to. Keep your agenda out of my schools. Stick to education, not indoctrination. Sick shitheads.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Boss, folks from left to right to libertarian have been arguing for pedophilia.

They were wrong then, they are wrong now.

Marriage equality is not a slippery slope to pedophilia. Why? Children can't consent.

 

[Antares]

Jake you once said you'd only made love to men in your entire life, I support your right to marry one of them.

 

[RandallFlagg]

And there are two major snags on the way there:

1. The civil rights of children trumping that of so-called "gay Americans" [what about polygamy-Americans? ] See this thread for details: http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-forced-to-adopt-orphans-to-these-people.html

2. The 14th applying to a limited set of deviant sexual behaviors, indeed a cult, who are "proud" of displaying lewd sex acts in parades down Everytown USA where they anticipate and hope children will be in attendance watching...and who have elected as their sexual messiah, one Harvey Milk who preyed on minor teen boys to officate as "father figure/guardian" to while he sodomized them and dumped one after another as they aged past their "use by" date...

Thank You! "Civil Rights" for perverts but to hell with the children. Anyone who has ever seen one of those "Gay Parade" fiascos can attest to their lewdness - but after all...it's their "right".

It's bullshit of the highest order. And the "attorney's" that represent this as "normal" should have their asses kicked up one side of the street and down the other.

I've been to many Gay Pride Parades from NYC to San Francisco to Long Beach to San Diego.....how many have you been to?

While there are a few bar floats with scantily clad dancers....most marchers are sports clubs, churches, politicians, help organizations, military (in the last few years), businesses, etc.

So...again...how many gay pride parades have you been to?

Before my Son retired from the Navy, my Wife and I went to vista him and his family in San Diego. As a joke, My Son took me to a "Navy parade" (or that was how he sold it to me - thought it would be funny), It was not. It didn't take him long to realize that I was pissed. To make matters WORSE, Goddamned fags were marching in that perverse "parade" in uniform. We left after 10 minutes and I gave him hell all the way to his home in Chula Vista.

I still raise hell for him doing that to me.

Does San Diego count, bitch?

It was the most disgusting thing I have ever witnessed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Before my Son retired from the Navy, my Wife and I went to vista him and his family in San Diego. As a joke, My Son took me to a "Navy parade" (or that was how he sold it to me - thought it would be funny), It was not. It didn't take him long to realize that I was pissed. To make matters WORSE, Goddamned fags were marching in that perverse "parade" in uniform. We left after 10 minutes and I gave him hell all the way to his home in Chula Vista.

I still raise hell for him doing that to me.

Does San Diego count, bitch?

It was the most disgusting thing I have ever witnessed.

Your son is sensible, you are not.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

Boss, folks from left to right to libertarian have been arguing for pedophilia.

They were wrong then, they are wrong now.

Marriage equality is not a slippery slope to pedophilia. Why? Children can't consent.

You clearly have no knowledge of age of consent laws, they have changed throughout history, vary from state to state, and from country to country. It is most certainly conceivable that the disproportionately large pedophile streak in the homosexual community could push for lowering age of consent to 12 or 13, or all together. They initially wanted to abolish age of consent laws all together in the initial gay rights platform.


First Gay Rights Platform in 1972

STATE LEVEL:
2. Repeal of all state laws prohibiting private sexual acts involving consenting persons; equalization for homosexuals and heterosexuals for the enforcement of all laws.

The 1972 Gay Rights Platform Platform created at the National Coalition of Gay Organizations Convention held in Chicago in 1972

Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually.

The proportions of heterosexual and homos... [J Sex Marital Ther. 1992] - PubMed - NCBI

Also, the question of homosexuals being able to consent would have been considered an issue 40 years ago, as homosexuality was deemed a mental illness. Pedophilia, with these pronouncements by these judges, psychologists, and professors is having a very similar path that homosexuality did 40 years ago.

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the “closet” and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA’s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard.

http://www.behaviorismandmentalheal...osexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

 

[koshergrl]

Omg a couple of years ago Bode was posting all sorts of queer *pride* parade images, with nancies in *uniform*...The meme was "troops are marching in gay pride parades" as if it was condoned by the military, and officially endorsed by them.

 

[Slyhunter]

Slippery slope from what to what? What is the cause and effect?

Your being obtuse.

We've slipped from what to what? Why is that so hard for you to articulate given that you keep insisting that a slippery slope event occurred.

What. to. What.

From gays wanting special rights, ie SSM, to group marriages, polygamy, and even ignoring age limits.

If you don't need legal consent, for under 18's, to go hunting, swimming, etc why do you need legal consent to have sex?

In France they believe that immature 14 year old females shouldn't be taught sex by immature 14 year old males but by older more mature men who will teach them the joys of sex. Then those 14 year old girls will turn around and teach their lessons to the 14 year old males.

Slippery slope, lowering the so call age of consent. They can hunt, why can't they have sex?

 

[koshergrl]

Boss, folks from left to right to libertarian have been arguing for pedophilia.

They were wrong then, they are wrong now.

Marriage equality is not a slippery slope to pedophilia. Why? Children can't consent.

You clearly have no knowledge of age of consent laws, they have changed throughout history, vary from state to state, and from country to country. It is most certainly conceivable that the disproportionately large pedophile streak in the homosexual community could push for lowering age of consent to 12 or 13, or all together. They initially wanted to abolish age of consent laws all together in the initial gay rights platform.


First Gay Rights Platform in 1972

STATE LEVEL:
2. Repeal of all state laws prohibiting private sexual acts involving consenting persons; equalization for homosexuals and heterosexuals for the enforcement of all laws.

The 1972 Gay Rights Platform Platform created at the National Coalition of Gay Organizations Convention held in Chicago in 1972

Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1. This suggests that the resulting proportion of true pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually.

The proportions of heterosexual and homos... [J Sex Marital Ther. 1992] - PubMed - NCBI

Also, the question of homosexuals being able to consent would have been considered an issue 40 years ago, as homosexuality was deemed a mental illness. Pedophilia, with these pronouncements by these judges, psychologists, and professors is having a very similar path that homosexuality did 40 years ago.

Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the “closet” and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA’s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard.

http://www.behaviorismandmentalheal...osexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

Homosexual relations were illegal before they were normalized.

The queer bloc is working overtime to normalize pedophilia as well. It starts with designating it as a sexual orientation, and goes from there.

You'll also find a lot of "children's rights" advocates...not the ones who take a stand against abuse, but the ones who maintain children should have the *right* to participate in sexual relationships and make decisions for themselves....are just pedophiles in disguise.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Before my Son retired from the Navy, my Wife and I went to vista him and his family in San Diego. As a joke, My Son took me to a "Navy parade" (or that was how he sold it to me - thought it would be funny), It was not. It didn't take him long to realize that I was pissed. To make matters WORSE, Goddamned fags were marching in that perverse "parade" in uniform. We left after 10 minutes and I gave him hell all the way to his home in Chula Vista.

I still raise hell for him doing that to me.

Does San Diego count, bitch?

It was the most disgusting thing I have ever witnessed.

Your son is sensible, you are not.

I'll tell you the same thing I told my son. Don't ever make that mistake again dumbass.